I'm not sure where to start. Perhaps with NAT codes and their effect on gameplay itself. I understand that UBISOFT has noted that the game operates more effectively when in an Open NAT setting but I'm wondering to what effect. I play on the same system at home on an OPEN NAT Type and at work on a STRICT NAT Type. The differences are almost night and day. On Open NAT I notice far fewer latency issues such as failed bullet registration, shadow characters (taking damage at a location you are no longer at), and the infamous invisible rounds where the enemy fires on their screen but not on yours. If the NAT Type, specifically, is cause to this kind of delayed functionality this is a serious failure on part of UBISOFT. In comparison, I've played games such as Battlefield 4 and Battlefield 1 Beta, with 6 times the number of active players and twice the map size with less issues. And you can't say a game of 10 players can be anywhere near as processor/network intensive. I'm wondering how and why can't you license the game servers out like most FPS games do allow other companies and people manage the servers while you produce a more functional game. As of now it's almost unplayable on a STRICT NAT. Granted the easy response to this is "Open the NAT or don't play at all" and I admit that's a reasonable first response. But when looking at the underwhelming number of players on at any given time, and the fact that other AAA games are providing a much more competent online gaming platform. One bodes to ask "When will you make your customers a priority and fix these issues?"

PuppetMasterr

09-30-2016, 05:24 PM

I've NAT open and I mention same issues. I also think that people with low ping has some disadvantage against people with higher ping.